TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 330
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....findings; hence rejected. 3. In ground No.1 the assessee has pleaded as under:- "The learned Assessing Officer has disallowed and the appellate Commissioner of Income Tax has confirmed the disallowance of Rs. 1 Crore being obsolete inventory written off on the ground that no justification was given for inventories becoming obsolete and also believes that the same should have been written off gradually. Your appellant submits that detailed justification was provided that the "Super Max" computers had become out dated and that the appellant company regularly reviews the inventories at the balance sheet date. Moreover, the inventories are valued according to AS2. Hence gradual writing off would be against the generally accepted accounti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Assessee was consistently following accounting method of recognizing and writing off obsolete items of inventories. During the year under consideration also, the assessee had identified and written off such obsolete inventories as per accounting method followed by it. Against the contention of the learned Assessing Officer that there should have been gradual write off, assessee has submitted that it has consistently followed the accounting principle laid down by AS2. Therefore, the value of inventory is recognized at lower of cost or net relizable value. Thus the practice of writing down inventories below cost to NRV is consistent with the view that the assets should not be carried in excess of amounts expected to be realized from their s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as also noted that majority of the items have been issued which is prior to the accounting year. Therefore, same cannot be treated as slow moving or obsolete stock. On consideration of the above facts and details pointed out by the learned Counsel for the assessee we find no infirmity in the finding of the learned CIT(A) because majority of the items were issued prior to the starting of the financial year and further no evidence has been furnished in support of the claim of the assessee. In the absence of any material or evidence to support the claim of the assessee, we do not find any justification to interfere with the orders of the authorities below. In absence of evidence case law would not support claim of the assessee. We confirm thei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hearing, M/s. Deloitte Hakins & Sells LLP earlier used to appear on behalf of the assessee; however, vide letter dated 30th September 2019, Shri Sanjay R. Shah, Authorized Representative on behalf of M/s. Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP submitted that insolvency proceedings have been taken up against the assessee and Shri Kiran Chinubhai Shah has been appointed as Interim Resolution Professional by the NCLT. He placed on record copy of the order the NCLT dated 27.11.2018. He requested that the notice be issued to Shri Kiran Chinubhai Shah and he did not wish to argue the appeal on behalf of the assessee. Fresh notices were sent to the assessee through the DR office. The Bench Clerk has contacted Shri Kiran Chinubhai Shah on his mobile phone ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee has pleaded as under:- "The learned Assessing Officer has disallowed Rs. 22848056/- on account of prior period expense. Your appellant submits that with regard to Rs. 10635668/- relating to bank charges and Rs. 7895142/- relating to purchases, since the differences in bank charges amounting to Rs. 10635668/- were noticed in AY 2008-09 and debited as prior period expense and pertaining to AY 2007-08, the same should be allowed in AY 2007-08. Moreover, in case of purchases amounting to Rs. 7895142/- since the income from the said purchases was booked in AY 2007-08 and the bills were issued in AY 2007-08 and received in AY 2008-09 and therefore accounted in AY 2008-09 as prior period, the same should be allowable for AY 2007-08." 9. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the payees which are bearing the dates within F.Y. 2006-07. However, some hand written entries are appearing on these computerized sheets without any date which suggest that the amounts receivable was not received in full by the assessee as the bank charges were deducted by the bank. The assessee has accounted for this shortfall / expenses in its books of accounts as on 31.03.2008. The A.O. has held that these intimations of shortfall of negotiations are pertaining to the period subsequent to finalization of books for A.Y. 2007-08 hence they have crystallized in the subsequent year. Hand written entries based on subsequent statement / subsequent intimation by the bank regarding bank charges cannot be allowed as deduction in A.Y. 2007....